Skip to main content

Full text of "Of Slavery And Abortion"

See other formats


/7T\ The 

M BEACON SpotLight 




A Study of Constitutional Issues by Topic 


Issue 2: Of Slavery and Abortion 


January 22, 2010 
37 th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade 

Mere mention of the word “slavery” today 
conjures up a regrettable period of American 
history where men owned men, in stark contrast to 
the ideals of life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness 
and unalienable rights discussed within the 
Declaration of Independence. 

Though Thomas Jefferson referred to the slave 
trade within his original draft of the Declaration as 
an "assemblage of horrors" and “execrable 
commerce”, he owned slaves. 

Many Americans today chastise Jefferson and 
the other founding fathers who were slave owners 
as hypocrites; few people today can understand 
why these influential men did not end the travesty 
sooner. 

Slavery, after all, was all about the strong and 
powerful oppressing the weak and defenseless into 
a demeaning life of drudgery according to the 
whims of the slave owner. 

As soon as the timetable of the Constitution 
permitted (by Article I, Section 9, Clause 1), 
President Jefferson signed into law an act outlawing 
the trading in foreign slaves (Volume II, Statutes at 
Large, Page 426, 1807 [effective January 1, 1808]) 
and the foreign slave trade became an act of piracy 
punishable by death in 1820 (III Stat. 600). 


Census numbers show the number of slaves 
within the United States grew from 1,191,632 in 
1810 to 3,953,760 in 1860. 

Since slaves were no longer imported, the 
tripling within this period therefore came from 
births within the U.S. This fact provides 
convincing evidence that slavery did not adversely 
affect the quantity of life. 

Although slavery was antithetical to liberty, it at 
least allowed life. While quality of life is of great 
importance, of arguably far greater importance is 
life itself. 

The U.S. supreme Court, in their infamous 
1857 Dred Scott case, upheld slavery, for that was 
the only decision they were empowered to make at 
the time considering the laws of the era. It was not 
until the South succeeded from the Union (and out 
from under the Constitution's protections of 
property) that the wheels of progress and social 
justice were set in motion which soon enacted laws 
and amendments outlawing involuntary servitude 
(except as punishment of crime) within the U. S. 
That the supreme Court upheld a social travesty in 
one decade but that this travesty was abolished in 
the next is but a prelude of things to come. 

As great an injustice was slavery, there is a far 
greater injustice allowed in the United States today 
against the most helpless of victims who can do 
nothing in their own defense — that of aborting 
unborn children. 


Distributed by the Foundation For Liberty 
Copyright 2010 by Beacon of Liberty, LLC. 


www.FoundationForLiberty.org 












It is difficult to estimate the total number of slaves 
which lived in the American colonies and early States, 
but with 4 million slaves alive in 1860, perhaps there 
were again that many that had lived previously. It is 
likely their number did not amount to more than 10- 
12 million in total. 

There have been an estimated 50 million abortions 
carried out in the United States in the 37 bloodied 
years since the U.S. supreme Court's infamous Roe v. 
Wade case decided on January 22, 1973 (with many 
millions more performed before this case without 
apparent court sanction). 

If those aborted fetuses would have instead been 
allowed to come to term, and had been allowed to live 
life at least as slaves, Americans today would still be 
four to six times greater at fault than the travesty 
allowed by our fore fathers. 

Of course, these unborn children were not even 
given the chance afforded a slave in early America, to 
live life outside their incubator's womb (if a woman 
voluntarily seeks to end the life inside her, it seems 
extremely unjust to refer to her as a "mother"). 

Capital punishment is reserved only for the most 
heinous of crimes; instead imprisonment for a term is 
generally given in acknowledgment that life is sacred 
even for all but the most contemptuous of the 
condemned. This finding shows that incarceration, or 
involuntary servitude (which no longer even stretches 
to "hard labor"), is of far lesser punishment than death. 

Of course, the only crime committed by the 
unborn child who is voluntarily terminated at the 
“choice” of another is being conceived during a period 
of profound indifference and legal ignorance. 

Every year, our fallen veterans are remembered on 
Memorial Day for their sacrifices to maintain our life 
and liberty, yet there have been numerous years where 
there have been more unborn U.S. children aborted in 
that single year than the total number of troops that 
have died in combat in all the American wars and 
skirmishes combined since the Revolutionary War 
(about 1.3 million). 

Most all Americans know that abortion was 
legalized in America in the infamous U.S. supreme 
Court case of Roe v. Wade, where the Court stated: 


"We, therefore, conclude that the right to 
personal privacy includes the abortion decision, 
but that this right is not unqualified and must be 
considered against important state interest in 
regulation". 

Upon a careful reading of the case, however, one 
will find that the court did no such thing as legalize 
abortion. 

Finding that the right of privacy extends to the 
abortion decision in no way protects and legalizes the 
abortion procedure. That the term "the abortion 
decision" was of utmost importance is shown by its 
repeated use within the ruling. 

When law is consistent, judges have no choice but 
to enforce it. "Judicial activism" is merely proof of 
legislative inconsistency or improper enforcement 
procedures. When one law contradicts another, it is 
up to the judicial system to attempt to sort out the 
mess (when the legislature fails to cure their ills). 

Regarding Roe v. Wade, one must clarify the 
implications of the ruling. It is easier to understand a 
simple example: if the police capture a purse snatcher 
but fail to uphold law and proper procedure during the 
arrest or in the gathering of evidence (to uphold the 
principles of "Due Process", "innocent until proven 
guilty", etc.), then it is quite possible that the judge or 
jury will let the criminal go free without punishment. 

It is absolutely incorrect to infer from this hypothetical 
case that purse snatching was made legal, however. 

So too is it important to understand the legal 
implications in real cases such as Roe v. Wade. 

When a doctor commits the crime of abortion 
where such a procedure is properly and consistently 
made illegal, then that doctor and the willing pregnant 
participant can and will suffer the prescribed 
punishments when found guilty, just as any other 
crime properly delineated and enforced. 

Fiowever, when a doctor commits the crime of 
abortion where such procedure is inconsistently made 
illegal, then both the doctor and the patient may quite 
likely go free without punishment. This is all that 
occurred in Roe v. Wade. 

The remedy, of course, is to remove inconsistencies 
at law, not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. 


The Beacon SpotLight: Issue 2: Page 2 



The 1973 Court brought to light the 
inconsistencies of the abortion law of Texas under 
which "Roe" was being tried. The Court even 
footnoted (without comment) Wisconsin's clear law 
that an "unborn child" was "a human being from the 
time of conception until it is born alive". Such a clear 
definition proves impenetrable to court activism when 
properly supported. 

The right to personal privacy may well include the 
"abortion decision", but these expressly-limited words 
do not in any way stretch to include the "abortion 
procedure". Such procedures are well within the 
prescribed authority of the state to limit. 

Planned Parenthood has become the leading 
provider of abortions in the United States over the 37 
years since Roe v. Wade. It is difficult to defend 
against the argument that Planned Parenthood has 
grown into a self-serving business organization that 
promotes abortion to maintain and increase its budget 
and influence. 

Even its radical founder, Margaret Sanger, no 
stranger to controversy herself, wrote in opposition to 
abortion: 

"While there are cases where even the law 
recognizes an abortion as justifiable if 
recommended by a physician, I assert that the 
hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in 
America each year are a disgrace to civilization" 

(Woman and the New Race [1920]). 

Sanger was a fervent proponent of birth control 
and even sterilization, but not abortion. Some of 
Sanger's notoriously memorable quotes are (from her 
book, The Pivot of Civilization [1922]): 

"The emergency problem of segregation and 
sterilization must be faced immediately. Every 
feeble-minded girl or woman of the hereditary 
type, especially of the moron class, should be 
segregated during the reproductive period. 
Otherwise, she is almost certain to bear imbecile 
children, who in turn are just as certain to breed 
other defectives. The male defectives are no less 
dangerous. Segregation carried out for one or 
two generations would give us only partial 
control of the problem." 


"Moreover, when we realize that each feeble¬ 
minded person is a potential source of an 
endless progeny of defect, we prefer the policy 
of immediate sterilization, of making sure that 
parenthood is absolutely prohibited to the feeble¬ 
minded." 

Planned Parenthood was formed by Sanger when 
she found that she needed a "cosmetic" change for her 
earlier organization, the American Birth Control 
League, which had developed too much of a "Nazi 
smell" of racial purification to continue to grow its 
influence (not that Sanger renounced her positions). 

Indeed, almost four times as many black women 
and two and a half times as many Hispanic women 
have abortions today as compared with white women. 
It is well past time that leaders of minority ethnic 
groups begin to understand the devastating effect 
abortion has on their race and their psyche, and learn 
that abortion is not about "choice" but racial and 
hereditary purity and eradication of the poor. 

Advocates of state-sanctioned abortion tell horror 
stories of young women of yesteryear aborting their 
fetuses in back rooms with coat hangers to support 
their contention that abortion is the lesser of two evils. 

However, such practices were from a time when 
social mores were such that an unwed mother was 
socially blacklisted from her community and the 
resultant shame of a growing belly without a ring on 
the finger affected families in ways which are 
essentially irrelevant today. The very loosening of 
society's moral compass against unwed mothers and 
even teenage pregnancies has undermined one of 
abortion's most potent historical arguments. 

Abortion is now sold on convenience and freedom 
from accountability than anything else. Inconvenience 
and irresponsibility are hardly shining principles to 
rally around when life and death are concerned. 

The manner by which society protects its most 
vulnerable foretells its future. Abortion, as slavery, will 
inevitably be but a dark footnote in American history. 
Americans may well soon be judged, but it is not the 
framers of our government which bear the greatest 
fault. 


The Beacon SpotLight: Issue 2: Page 3 


Distributed by the Foundation For Liberty 
Copyright 2010 by Beacon of Liberty, LLC. 


WWW.FoundationForLiberty.org 


A